| Applicant name | VLAISAVLJEVIKJ |
| Applicant type | natural person |
| Number of applicants | 1 |
| Country | NORTH MACEDONIA |
| Application no. | 23215/21 |
| Date | 25/06/2024 |
| Judges | Arnfinn Bårdsen, President, Jovan Ilievski, Pauliine Koskelo, Lorraine Schembri Orland, Frédéric Krenc, Davor Derenčinović, Gediminas Sagatys |
| Institution | Court |
| Type | Judgment |
| Outcome Art. 8 | violation |
| Reason | Positive obligation |
| Type of privacy | Informational privacy; procedural privacy |
| Keywords | |
| Facts of the case | The applicant complained that the domestic authorities had failed to protect him against the unlawful collection and use of his personal data, in violation of Article 8 of the Convention, which reads as follows: |
| Analysis | When deciding the applicant’s data protection complaint both the Directorate and the Higher Administrative Court refused to consider whether he had been obliged to pay the standing heating charge or not, holding that the proprietary rights or any creditor-debtor relationship was irrelevant to their assessment of the applicant’s personal data protection complaint. In particular, they did not give any weight to the specific circumstances of the applicant’s case, notably the applicant’s claim that he had never been connected to the heating system and the fact that the domestic civil courts had found the applicant not liable to pay the standing heating charge, whereas had he been, as explained above, that could have justified the collection and use of his personal data. This being so, the Court cannot but conclude that the domestic courts never actually examined the core of the applicant’s claim because of the lack of a comprehensive examination of the question whether, in the absence of a contractual or any other legal relationship between the applicant and the heat supplier, the continued retention and use of the applicant’s data corresponded to that legitimate aim. In view of the above considerations, the Court concludes that the domestic courts failed to provide an effective protection for the applicant’s right to respect for his private life. |
| Other Article violation? | – |
| Damage awarded | that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 1,400 (one thousand and four hundred euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement; (b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points; |
| Documents | Judgment |